Reply to Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Good for Blake. She forced them to say that her point of view had merit and deserved to be heard. Yes it did. [/quote]

She quite literally was shown to be a liar and had her career ruined. And it was only getting worse at trial here there would be abundant evidence that people find her unlikable whenever she opens her mouth in an unscripted setting.[/quote]

And yet Wayfarer made a huge concession in the public statement. Why is that, do you think? [/quote]

People aren’t being reasonable. While Wayfarer had a good chance of being fully vindicated at trial, a trial is always a risk. In this case, wayfarer is the one being sued and the only one at risk of losing even more money. The statement, which was from the lawyers by the way, [b]strongly suggests that the deal was no money[/b] but a face saving statement for Blake. I know we all wanted to see wayfarer vindicated but we weren’t the ones at risk of losing millions more, no matter how small the risk might have seemed.[/quote]

In what way? It simply doesn't mention money at all, which is not uncommon for settlement statements. It was almost certainly a requirement for negotiation (that there be absolutely no hint at how much money changed hands).[/quote]

Keep dreaming, Blake lost nearly all her case on summary judgment, lost on the jury instructions she wanted, didn’t want the stipulation the judge was going to force on her, and was facing new accusations of destroying evidence that contradicted her depo testimony.

And, she didn’t even get an apology.  She clearly caved and that was smart because she was going to have to face testimony on Van Zann, destroying dailies, and how much the general population organically dislikes her.  First smart move she has made in several years.[/quote]

VanZann and these dailies would not have been discussed at trial, as they have nothing to do with her claims. Trial doesn't work like the TMZ bullpen sessions, folks.

Baldoni lost his entire countersuit to dismissal. Against NYT as well. Had his lead lawyer formally sanctioned by the court. Was still facing retaliation claims, the strongest and central part of her case, despite her SH claims being dismissed. Still expected to have to testify after a messy deposition. Still had to account for Jed Wallace, a huge liability, and Melissa Nathan, also a liability. Had to face comparisons to people like Johnny Depp, the Alexander Brothers, and RFK Jr., TAG's/Wallace's other clients. Had to face testimony from Katie Case, whose deposition and evidence showed both Wallace and Nathan to have lied in their own testimony.

The complete inability to recognize the problems in Justin's own case, Wayfarer's very real risk of liability, and the publicity risk when Justin actually had to take the stand and justify his texts to Jen Abel about Blake or explain his working relationship with Melissa Nathan and Jed Wallace over the last two years, is like some kind of mental illness.

The both had real risk here. You just refuse to see it because you've been leaning on "she's a liar, he's an angel" for the last 18 months. One of the bit benefits to Justin of this settlement (and perhaps a reason to fork over some cash) is that the trial would have undermined both those assumptions in a big way.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics